quote:
Regardless of all the "facts" quoted here by both sides, the "fact" remains that the jury was made up of all white women plus one hispanic female. GZ's atty was openly pleased by the jury selection & was quoted on tv as saying this was exactly the type of jury the defense wanted. That the 17 yr old kid who was killed was black & wearing a hoodie is also a fact. You can say this was not a raced based case all you want,but reverse the races of all the parties described here & tell me you would not be screaming for a guilty decision. And I am no flaming liberal, as I was voting the GOP ticket long before it became the fashionable thing to do

Here's a little known fact.

After jury selection, the prosecution is as capable of making a Batson challenge as the defense.

Since they didn't do so in this case, one must assume they were satisfied with the jury too. Further, the right to trial by a jury of your peers goes to the defendant and the black male wasn't on trial.

As far as if it were reversed, with the same facts (I actually followed the trial, watching a good bit of it) then hell no I wouldn't be calling for a conviction. The evidence was overwhelming that GZ acted in self defense. Based on the testimony of the only witness to see the fight pre-shooting and the testimony of the state's star witness, TM all but certainly started the fight. That same star witness is the one that also said TM referred to GZ with a racial slur. Despite the best and mostly successful efforts of NBC to alter the facts (something they're about to pay several million for doing), the truth is that GZ didn't even bring up TM's race until prompted by 911 and even then noted he wasn't sure.

The jury got it right. The only shame is that those who fanned the flames without the facts (which include the POTUS) don't have the integrity to come out and say they were wrong.